- Arday had no academic integrity.
- The plagiarism was massive, proven, and undeniable.
- There was no smear. Arday’s response wasn’t to rebut the claims, but to cry racism.
- There is no academic freedom to lie, steal the work of others, and obtain undeserved positions.
- Fairness involves investigating serious allegations, which is what was underway. Due process couldn’t be completed: Arday resigned rather than defend himself, because he knew he could not.
- This….”When a distinguished Black academic is repeatedly subjected to baseless allegations after being fully exonerated, it signals there is an attempt to undermine Black people who hold positions of influence”…is so head-exploding it should be given some kind of prize. Arday was distinguished only in the extent of his lies. Of course the allegations weren’t “baseless”; this amounts to gaslighting. He wasn’t exonerated, much less “fully exonerated.” The incident signals a rare effort to hold academics “of color” to the same standards as everyone else.
- So what if he was a “working class black man”? The Yorkshire Ripper was a working class white man…
- His journey was remarkable, all right…remarkable because it was based on fantasies and lies that were there for everyone to see, but he was allowed to continue exploiting them anyway.
- How many times does this letter state that the allegations against Arday were “comprehensively rejected,” when the opposite is true? No wonder these people stand in solidarity with the fraud: they are liars too.
- Arday’s charitable and community service was also fabricated.
- The signatories to the letter are sending that damaging “message” to black and brown scholars by falsely representing Arday as a victim rather than as a lesson in accountability, excellence and achievement being judged by reality rather than group favoritism, and just desserts.
- “signalling that success and public service may be met with hostility, misrepresentation, and disproportionate scrutiny”…can you believe this junk? That letter may be the most flagrantly dishonest open letter or petition in the history of civilization.
The signatories are members of Parliament, professors, writers and artists. Their names should be put on billboards all over the UK. No one should trust them, vote for them, believe them, employ them or pay any attention to them, ever.
Another transparently dishonest narrative to try to tar the good guys in this episode is that Arday was picked out of obscurity for destruction. In reality, his whole hoax was aimed at self-glorification and celerity-seeking, and it worked…
But the Left’s addiction to playing the race card every time it can serve as a distraction is so embedded in our culture that even the The Wall Street Journal wrote, “Jason Arday’s academic rise and fall set off a debate about whether he was a plagiarist or victim of a racial witch hunt.” He was a plagiarist, so he couldn’t be a victim of a racial witch hunt! What took him down was the fact that he was so much more than a plagiarist, a full-scale imposter on the scale of Frank Abagnale, Jr., who wrote an almost entirely fake autobiography that got made into a Spielberg movie.
I have been frustrated beyond my limit today, as every single Democrat, progressive and apologist for anti white, anti-male discrimination I have questioned had barely paid attention to the Arday affair. It’s just a minor academic scandal in the UK…what’s the big deal, they say. Is it contrived ignorance, or do they really not understand the significance of what occurred, and what it says about their values, their ideological allies, and the havoc their wrong-headed obsessions are inflicting on society?
Ethics Alarms 
What makes you think that the signatures are any more honest than the arguments?
It would be perfectly consistent for the lying defenders of the lying professor to lie about the signatures on their compilation of lies.
How soon before his statue is erected on the green at Cambridge? My guess is no later than this time next year.
Fake everything with an entire apparatus backing it up. Western society is officially doomed.
AI should be feared, but not nearly as much as these people.
That was the thrust of a comment I recently made on the subject. Academia is clearly chock-full of fraudulent pseudo-intellectuals riding the coattails of greater men who have gone before. But as long as all the insiders back each other up, the whole rotten edifice still looks sound to casual outside observers.
I’d say the entire letter, and not just a single phrase, can best be understood as gaslighting. Incredibly brazen. I was expecting a collection of rationalizations and excuses, but this is simply an absolute denial of reality. Weird.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Roberts_(educator)
Coincidence?
The KKK had an element of people in power gatekeeping hiring processes to exclude qualified candidates based on the color of their skin.
That exact thing happens now, but they use the initials DEI.
I am struggling what the takeaway of this Jason Arday trainwreck should be. A lot of players act in a very predictable fashion. So here is the sequence of events:
I am struggling what the takeaway of this Jason Arday trainwreck should be. We have seen this game before, with lots of predictable actions by the usual players.
I was wondering about the commenter’s reactions to Todd Grande’s video which pays attention to the mental issues by Jason Arday which were ignored by the University of Cambridge.
About the endgame with all the blaming and playing the race card, how much attention and energy should we spend on this? How should we react to playing the race card? In the seventies, people who were called out on a racial issue felt a sense of guilt. After 2000 an accusation of racism was met with angry denials (which did not do any good by the way). After 2024 the race card has run out of credit with no balance left, and many people (the generations younger than the baby boomers) react with a shrug.
My preference goes to the latter approach. If somebody makes an accusation of racism then he goes in my category of people whose opinions do not have to be taken seriously anymore. They will be added to the list of people to be ignored, and silently cut off from my social circle. No need to get angry and respond. Maybe poking some fun maybe in order. No walking on eggshells anymore, instead loosening up.
Who are the real victims of this DEI phenomenon? I imagine myself being an employer, going over a resume of somebody with a first name common among blacks, who graduated from the University of Cambridge or some other woke college. Would I invite him for an interview? Or would I put his resume aside, being distrustful because of all the DEI, affirmative action, grade inflation that is common at these universities. How do I recognize the excellence of the candidates who resumes I am reviewing?